Implementation and results of an enhanced recovery (fast-track) program in total knee replacement patients at a French university hospital.

INTRODUCTION: In total knee replacement (TKR) surgeries, "fast-track" or enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are being developed, but their impact on care pathway quality and safety has not been fully explored in the French literature. The present study aimed to compare results in TKR between fast-track and conventional pathways, addressing the following questions: (1) Are 90-day rates of complications, readmission and surgical revision higher with fast-track? (2) Is mean length of stay (LoS) shorter with fast-track? (3) Are postoperative pain and clinical results improved by fast-track? And, (4) are patients and care staff satisfied with these new programs? HYPOTHESIS: Implementing fast-track for TKR in a university hospital center is beneficial for the patient and does not impair the quality and safety of care. PATIENTS AND METHOD: A case-control study was performed using a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. A fast-track program was implemented for TKR by modifying the care pathway. This involved instituting a therapeutic education consultation, optimizing blood sparing, modifying surgical practices, and hastening early mobilization thus actively involving patients in their own management. Between January 2017 and January 2019, 216 patients with a mean age of 69.23±7.80years and mean BMI of 30.15±4.79kg/m2 were included in the fast-track group, with 335 matched patients included in the conventional group. RESULTS: At 90days, there were no significant inter-group differences in rates of infection (fast-track=1.39%, conventional=0.90%; p=0.34), readmission (fast-track=3.24%, conventional=3.58%; p=0.49), or surgical revision (fast-track=2.78%, conventional=2.69%; p=0.298). The visual analog scale (VAS) pain rating was 1.56±1.36 in the fast-track group versus 5±2.41 in the conventional group; p<0.001. LoS was 3.17±1.59days in fast-track versus 7.25±1.85days in the conventional group; p<0.001. Ninety-five percent of patients and 96% of care staff were satisfied with the fast-track program. DISCUSSION: Fast-track implementation ensured quality and safety of care; it did not increase the rate of complications in primary TKR. Mean length of stay was drastically reduced. Both patients and care staff were very satisfied with these new procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; case-control study.

A targeted remifentanil administration protocol based on the analgesia nociception index during vascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: The intraoperative modulation of opioids continues to be based on clinical signs. This may result in adverse events such as sympathetic reactivity or opioid-induced hyperalgesia. Recently, the Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI), a non-invasive 0-100 index derived from heart rate variability analysis, has been proposed for nociception assessment. However, the ability of the ANI to adequately guide intraoperative opioid administration has never been demonstrated. We designed a prospective study to evaluate the ability of the ANI to guide remifentanil administration in vascular surgery. METHODS: One hundred and eighty adults presenting for elective surgery were included. All received total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol adjusted to entropy and remifentanil adjusted to the ANI. The primary endpoint was the number of patients without any episode of reactivity defined as a 20% increase in heart rate or arterial pressure or the occurrence of movement. Secondary endpoints included opioid use and maximal pain rate in the first postoperative day. RESULTS: Anaesthesia was achieved without any episode of reactivity in 160 (89%) patients. Twenty-five episodes of reactivity occurred in 20 (11%) patients. The median remifentanil dose was 0.042 [0.040-0.044]µg.kg-1.min-1. At 24hours, the maximal NRS pain score was 2 [2,3]. One hundred and fifty-five patients (86%) did not receive any postoperative opioids, whereas 25 (14%) received a median dose of 5[5-10] mg of oxycodone. CONCLUSION: This prospective study demonstrated that the ANI can be used to adequately guide intraoperative remifentanil administration during vascular surgery. Such guidance resulted in low remifentanil consumption, low postoperative pain rates and low opioid rescue analgesia.

Aprotinin versus placebo in major orthopedic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, dose-ranging study.

UNLABELLED: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, dose-ranging study to compare the risk/benefit ratio of large- and small-dose aprotinin with placebo after major orthopedic surgery. Fifty-eight patients were randomized into three groups: Large-Dose Aprotinin (4 M kallikrein inactivator unit [KIU] bolus before surgery followed by a continuous infusion of 1 M KIU/h until the end of surgery), Small-Dose Aprotinin (2 M KIU bolus plus 0.5 M KIU/h), and Placebo. Bleeding was measured and calculated. Bilateral ascending venography was systematically performed on the third postoperative day. Measured and calculated blood loss decreased in the Large-Dose Aprotinin group (calculated bleeding, whole blood, hematocrit 30%, median [range], 2,023 mL [633-4,113] as compared with placebo, 3,577 mL [1,670-21,758 mL]). The total number of homologous and autologous units was also significantly decreased in the Large-Dose Aprotinin group (2 U [0-5 U] as compared with placebo, 4 U [0-42 U]). No increase in deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism was observed in the aprotinin groups. Large-dose aprotinin was safe and effective in dramatically reducing the measured and calculated bleeding and the amount of transfused red blood cell units after major orthopedic surgery. IMPLICATIONS: Large doses of aprotinin decrease blood loss and transfusion amount in major orthopedic surgery.